This play proved to be the toughest assignment for me so far. And the word assignment is pretty close to spot on. It FELT like a Uni assignment that I didn't enjoy, and kept putting off and as a result this whole 100 plays in 365 days is now well behind. So... let's knock it over.
I didn't like "Mother Courage and her Children" all that much. Partly because of my previously stated issues with Brecht, and partly because there are very few versions of this that I could find to watch. But I do think there's a good story in here... and maybe a good show just as it is... that depends on a good production.
I might add, I didn't guaranteed I'd write a blog for each play in this series (although I have done so, so far), just that I'd watch or experience 100 "great" plays in the allotted time. So I'll keep this thing brief so I don't lose all momentum.
The story (including spoilers)
This play was written in 1939 (on the cusp of the second world war, and largely as a response to Germany's invasion of Poland ) and is set during the 30 Years War that raged across Europe between 1618 and 1848. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
As with some other works by Brecht, it was a collaboration, in this case a frequent close collaborator of Brecht's, Margarete Steffin.
The story takes place across a 12 year period, 1624 to 1636, with each scene representing a new year. The eponymous Mother Courage, real name Anna Fierling, has a trading cart full of goods that she pushes from one battleground to the next with her three children in tow, selling provisions to soldiers (and civilians ) from all sides. Since war is going to happen, she reasons, we might as well profit from it... maybe a little like Milo Minderbinder from "Catch 22" although much less successful.
Through a series of encounters and responses, Mother Courage's three children are killed.
- Her son Eilif is enlisted into the army (as part of a negotiation between the army an his mother). At first he is branded a hero for killing peasants and their cattle, only to later be executed for doing the same thing.
- Her middle child, referred to as Swiss Cheese, becomes a paymaster in the army. When invading troops arrive, he hides the regiment's paybox. He is tortured and declares to his torturers that he had thrown the paybox in the river. Mother Courage tried to pay a bribe for his release but upon hearing he had thrown the money away she tries to backpedal on the bribe and he is murdered. Out of fear of being punished as a conspirator, she doesn't acknowledge his corpse and it is abandoned.
- When invading soldiers are planning to invade the town she is in, Mother Courage's daughter Kattrin attempts to warn the townsfolk by beating a drum to sound the alarm but she is shot and killed in the process.
With her children all murdered, Mother Courage once again picks up her cart and continues to travel around, selling provisions.
Breaking that down
Contextually, the play was written following the attempted Anschluss in 1938 and the invasion of Poland in 1939. Brecht the basis of the story from a character created by Hans Jakob Christoffel von Grimmelshausen that appeared in two of his works "Simplicius Simplicissimus" (1668) and "The Life of Courage" (1970), and built around it a searing
Brecht designed it as a searing indictment of war, fascism, profiteering and opportunism, with a side order of religious partisanship and zealotry thrown in on the side, and his instincts for a great concept serve him well. The guts of the story are quite potent, and since wars are like buses in as much as, if you miss one, there'll be another in an hour, timeless. And these topics as grist for the theatrical mill are very much my jam.
But again, my personal issue with Brecht is the manner of his story telling. Having said that, I'm not against some of the complexity of his characterisation though. Mother Courage being presented unsympathetically as an opportunist profiteering from the way regardless of the cost to those around her is a brave, meaty choice.
She is not without affection and caring for her kids, at least trying to secure Swiss Cheese freedom, before deciding to put herself first, and singing a lullaby over the body of her murdered daughter, but at several key moments she covers her own arse rather than her children's. It's a bit of an illustration of the biblical quote (Mark 8:36, and Matthew 16:26) "what does it profit a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul," which I particularly enjoy making that connection knowing Brecht's antipathy towards religion.
Incidentally, while depicting both Catholics and Protestants unsympathetically, it is most often the Catholics Brecht uses as the harsher, crueler antagonists in this play which may be based on historical accuracy (I'm not well enough informed) or because of his own opinions on that religion.
But having Mother Courage torn between her safety, financial success and survival, and her familial loyalties, is I think the greatest strength of the story. And clearly that's intended... her name is in the title of the show and clearly it's primarily about her journey, experiences and decisions. And something I do admire about Brecht (not something I say a lot) is that, in representing difficult "what would I do in this situation" dilemmas, he is willing to show the less-enlightened, less-heroic response which makes for a more powerful, impactful story. He discusses uncomfortable truths that can stay with an audience so kudos to Brecht for tackling difficult subject matter subversively.
It's just his desire to detach the audience from emotional connection, and his practice of trying to remove the suspension of disbelief (or should that be the encouragement of not fully engaging with the story) that drives me nuts. Yes, it's all very clever and post modern but in my terribly humble opinion it diminishes the impact of what I gladly concede is a potentially very pertinent and moving story.
I simply don't accept the premise that Continually reminding the audience, through fourth wall link pieces, overly bright lighting and other intrusive techniques to perpetually remind the audience that they are watching a play, and it's not real, and that they need to think (in order to promote taking action and make changes in their world) rather than emote improves the power of a show. I think it's ham-fisted dilettantism and a fundamental misreading, by it's practitioners, of the value of emotional engagement in theatre. But what do I know.
I guess it comes down to the performance
So... and I want to make my point clear... I believe Brecht has constructed the bones of a very powerful, thought-provoking and emotionally moving play. If he can only get out of his own way. If I had a director's cap, and I were to put it on, I would lean into the portrayal of a world in which a mother is forced into a life in which she felt driven to such cold, existential self-focus. Even when failing as a mother, there's a lot you can do with actor's and director's choices to show brief flashes of pain before returning to a more heartless exterior. And when she picks up her cart and continues after the loss of all three of her children, presents an opportunity for a particularly poignant and tragic realisation that her choices have led to this outcome juxtaposed with an indictment that war creates horrible situations in which we might all fall short of our best selves. To me, that's more powerful.
But not to Brecht. How do I know this? Frustrated by performances in 1941 in which he felt people over-sympathised with Mother Courage, he made changes to the play for a later production to no great effect. Despite his intent to remove an emotional connection to this very flawed woman who made decisions to ensure her profit from war and who stayed deliberately detached from crimes, audiences and critics made their own choices and this infuriated Brecht. To which I say, teach you to try and remove emotional connections from theatre. To paraphrase Jeff Goldblum from Jurassic Park, Emotions... uh... find way.
And the thing that infuriates me about Brecht's infuriation is that these two things can be true. You can make Mother Courage is flawed and in some ways as unlikeable as you like (as was his intent), but people can still overlay their response with a wart-is-hell infused appreciation of the things people do to survive (which wasn't his intention). And the really great bit is that people can land on any spot on that continuum... from sympathy toward her to anger and disgust at her actions and choices... and that's fine. It hits how it hits. AND... none of that prevents Brecht's desire for plays to provoke revolutionary action. It doesn't need to be solely a thought exercise.
Seeing is understanding?
At this point I usually discuss a version I've seen or heard, which often explicates the written play better than the words alone can. These have often been professional productions and I felt free to be as unfiltered and, if I felt warranted, as critical as I wanted to.
Unfortunately with "Mother Courage and her Children", all I could find was a Community Theatre version of the play. That's been the case with some other plays I've looked at, and it hasn't been a problem because they were quite good (and as I've often said, Community Theatre is quite often of a very high, professional standard. Just because performers may live in a regional area doesn't reflect on their ability.
But this performance I didn't particularly like. Now, elsewhere, I have written a number of reviews of Community Theatre performances, and one of my my rules of thumb is not to avoid criticising aspects of these performances and rather focus on their strengths. So I wont criticise this performance (even though it's doubtful anyone connected with it will read these words) beyond saying it didn't bring out the story for me.
There IS a version coming up shortly (at least there was when I wrote this so it's probably past now)... at the Phoenix Theatre in Coniston (Wollongong) from Friday 10 April to Saturday 18 April 2026. I'd like to see it although I'm a little over-committed / over-spent in my theatrical consumption this year. But I do feel fairly certain I'd have a better appreciation for the play if I'd seen this version... or many other versions.
Conclusion
Many of the Plays in this series of 100 plays I'm looking at are described as "the greatest", or "one of the greatest" but at least one person... and that's not a surprise as that sort of critical regard is part of how the 100 plays were chosen. Oskar Eustis, who has been the Artistic Director of the Public Theater in New York City since 2005, regards this play as the greatest play of the 20th century, and possibly the greatest anti-war play of all time. Strong words. And apparently many others agree.
Again, I can see how it COULD be. The bones are there. But for my personal appreciation, I'd need to see a version of Brecht's masterpiece performed with Brecht's directorial style guide.
Where I had intended to see/study/review four plays by Brecht, I've made the call to cut it off at just two. The two I'm cutting are "The Life of Galileo" and "The Caucasian Chalk Circle". Both are highly regarded so fee free to seek them out. I'm stopping at two for a few reasons.
Firstly, the works are exceedingly hard to find to watch and given the complexities of his approach to staging theatre I'd suggest it's crucial to see and hear his shows and not just rely on the words on a page.
Secondly, I have real issues with Brecht's approach to theatre. Obviously, he's a genius and who the hell am I. I'm willing to stipulate that for the record, your honour. But (a) I don't have to like him and (b) I'm quite free to say his approach to theatre is antithetical to mine and unlikely to change whether I read two or two hundred more of his works. Having said that, he has helped clarify my understanding of what I appreciate about theatre and that's not nothing.
And thirdly, as a result of those two points (the difficulty of finding his works, and my struggle with his messaging) I have found the Brecht section of my theatrical journey to be a real speed hump. It's made this part of this voluntary project a real punish, and slowed up proceeding considerably. To stay on target for my 100 plays in 365 days requires about two plays a week and this took two weeks to get to and to get through. It's like homework that you keep putting off, which makes everything else also behind and detracts from the enjoyment.
So, that's it for me and old Bertolt. If nothing else I am now more legitimately offer a slightly informed opinion about Brecht. I'm glad that I am now better informed and more greatly experienced, but parting in this case is not such sweet sorrow.
Fortunately my list of 100 plays is actually 106 plays long for just such a situation where I couldn't find or had to drop a play, so it's time to move on. Next up will be just one play by Thornton Wilder... Our Town, described by many (including playwright Edward Albee who we'll get to later) as, you guessed it, "the Greatest American Play ever written." I'm actually excite for this one. End scene.
Materials accessed
- "Mother Courage and her Children" - script (1939). Available for free at several places online including the "Academia" website.
- "Mother Courage and her Children" - video of theatrical production. This freely available video on Youtube doesn't mention the year of production or the name of the theatrical company.
No comments:
Post a Comment